/q/ - arisuchan meta

>>368
The content of the archive was made available to us by DogMan8, the developer behind the CatChan userscript. Thank you for making this possible. https://github.com/DogMan8

>>422
Why did you only finally mention this after my pestering?
>>382
>>383

Why did you entirely omit the fact that the archive was entirely from this dev initially? A dev you happened to ban (and then hide the ban for) for seemingly "being an asshole," not respecting Seph's gender pronouns or offering his script in a thread directly requesting the function his script provides (we'll never be sure the real reason since it was all memory holed). Why was the ban hidden, by the way? Why was the thread where the archive was handed over also deleted? Is his ban and the thread deletion related to him refusing to keep the archive out of the public domain as you requested?

>>474
>for seemingly "being an asshole," not respecting Seph's gender pronouns or offering his script in a thread directly requesting the function his script provides
He was derezzed for posting his script in unrelated threads, multiple times

>Is his ban and the thread deletion related to him refusing to keep the archive out of the public domain as you requested?
No. Appleman received this archive as well, and we did nothing to stop this.

>>474
I don't think this is the correct thread for this. Please post your queries in the correct threads; alternatively I invite you to come and join us on IRC, where we can discuss it further.

>>474
>Why did you entirely omit the fact that the archive was entirely from this dev initially?
This is valid criticism. It should have been noted on the archive index.

>A dev you happened to ban (and then hide the ban for) for seemingly "being an asshole," not respecting Seph's gender pronouns or offering his script in a thread directly requesting the function his script provides (we'll never be sure the real reason since it was all memory holed).
There is no reason we could ever provide that will satisfy you, but I will try anyways.

>Why was the ban hidden, by the way? Why was the thread where the archive was handed over also deleted? Is his ban and the thread deletion related to him refusing to keep the archive out of the public domain as you requested?
The archive thread was lost in the initial ban and delete that wiped all of his posts. He had repeatedly advertised his userscript in threads in which it was irrelevant (whether he agreed or not) and had not made a single post on the entire board unrelated to his userscript. In light of this a ban and delete was not unwarranted. This was not a spontaneous action. He had been asked to make a separate topic several times, but he refused. That's on him.

>>485
The only thread I saw him share it in, and the thread he was derezzed in, was undeniably directly relevant. Are you sure it wasn't for calling the admins "close-minded"? Why did Staph call him an asshole?

You ignored:
>Why did you entirely omit the fact that the archive was entirely from this dev initially?

>and we did nothing to stop this.
That's not true, iirc yall tried to get him to not give it to Apple or the public multiple times. you pushed pretty hard, he had to tell you straight that he was doing it for us, the users, and not you, the admins. Why was the thread deleted by the way? We could verify this easily if it wasn't. Is that why it was deleted?

>>485
the correct thread appears to be the one where mods ignore every post. Doesn't seem correct to me. the correct thread would probably be the one it actually occurred in, except all the relevant posts including the ban were deleted.

>>487
Hi again, do you think you could come into the IRC to discuss this issue, so it can be settled once and for all?

>>487
>Why did Staph call him an asshole?
You can't deny he was being obnoxious. She did not ban him for being an ass though. She specified precisely why she did it in the same exact post in which she called him an ass. You can see for yourself.
https://lainchan.jp/q/src/1493551646453.png

>>486
>had not made a single post on the entire board unrelated to his userscript
This is a retarded excuse. You requested he come here straight from his own dev thread on another site. why would his posts not be about his project? apparently, the only thing he did wrong was having the chutzpah to continue posting after you got what you wanted from him. Not only is it ungrateful, it's idiotic, at least in the case where he was derezzed, his script was exactly what people were requesting in the thread. instead of valuing the user's needs, you tried to memoryhole all discussion of it out of what only seems like a personal vendetta - the ban appears to be a result of egoism, it came immediately after addressing him for calling you close minded and was delivered with an accusation of being an asshole. If this was actually the case, as it looked like from my perspective, it should be acknowledged as a mistake - bans should be objective. What the fuck does staph think he's doing trying to enforce gender pronouns on anonymous imageboard anyway? It's completely inappropriate.

>He had been asked to make a separate topic several times, but he refused
Except he did? Remember, the thread you deleted on /b/?

In any case, deleting all the discussion surrounding the ban and the ban itself was not warranted, and the real fulcrum of the issue. do you intend to hide evidence of and censor discussion on all your bans or was this some kind of special case?

>>491
>This is a retarded excuse.
Is it an excuse to ban him? No. Is it an excuse to be more liberal with the ban and delete function? Yes.

>You requested he come here straight from his own dev thread on another site. why would his posts not be about his project? apparently, the only thing he did wrong was having the chutzpah to continue posting after you got what you wanted from him.
That's a convenient narrative you've got there. He was never asked to stop talking about his script. He was asked to make a separate topic. Even in the message in which she derezzed him he was explicitly invited to make a new thread about his project. The offer still stands.

>Not only is it ungrateful, it's idiotic, at least in the case where he was derezzed, his script was exactly what people were requesting in the thread. instead of valuing the user's needs, you tried to memoryhole all discussion of it out of what only seems like a personal vendetta - the ban appears to be a result of egoism, it came immediately after addressing him for calling you close minded and was delivered with an accusation of being an asshole. If this was actually the case, as it looked like from my perspective, it should be acknowledged as a mistake - bans should be objective.
I do not share your perspective. The reason for the ban was not subjective. It is explicitly specified on the bans page.

>What the fuck does staph think he's doing trying to enforce gender pronouns on anonymous imageboard anyway? It's completely inappropriate.
This never has and never will be enforced. See >>471.

>Except he did? Remember, the thread you deleted on /b/?
That was not a thread discussing his project. That was a thread discussing the transfer of the archive. When he was asked to make a new thread, that post still existed.

>In any case, deleting all the discussion surrounding the ban and the ban itself was not warranted, and the real fulcrum of the issue. do you intend to hide evidence of and censor discussion on all your bans or was this some kind of special case?
No, will not hide evidence and censor discussion of all our bans. All (read: one) of our bans are available for public viewing on our bans page.
https://lainchan.jp/bans.php

>>488
what? no. why would it need to be settled in an irc? Isn't this the point of this board? Why don't we hold it on google hangouts instead?

>>490
No, I don't think that's being that obnoxious. He has the right to criticize the administration, and him sharing the script in that post was for exactly the reasons he said: for the users. Deleting the post and all mention of it is at a cost to anons who were looking for exactly that kind of script. As I've said elsewhere, the ban reasons are nonsensical. And as far as I've seen, the only other warning he got was for making the 'mistake' of posting bugs relevant to catchan in the /q/ thread here, despite them being actual bugs in this site's code and also despite one of the admin's telling him explicitly they were interested in working with him to help make lainchan supported on catchan. He asked for a very clear yes or no before coming here.

The whole thing's just a soykafshow on lainchan's part, and hopefully it's just incompetence and not malice, but what I want to know is why the fuck did you delete all the evidence? do you recognize it was a mistake and hope to learn from it or are you going to keep doing it? is there any potential for this team to mature?

And do you have any plans to get rid of that cancerous applefag piece of soykaf Kalyx?

>>494
>what? no. why would it need to be settled in an irc? Isn't this the point of this board? Why don't we hold it on google hangouts instead?
It was an invitation. It was not a demand. I would think making yourself available on IRC would be a good thing. I thought you were all about decentralization and transparency.

>No, I don't think that's being that obnoxious. He has the right to criticize the administration, and him sharing the script in that post was for exactly the reasons he said: for the users. Deleting the post and all mention of it is at a cost to anons who were looking for exactly that kind of script.
Please stop saying that. No one ever said that he didn't have the right to criticize the administration. What do you think is happening here?

>As I've said elsewhere, the ban reasons are nonsensical.
That is your opinion.

>And as far as I've seen, the only other warning he got was for making the 'mistake' of posting bugs relevant to catchan in the /q/ thread here, despite them being actual bugs in this site's code and also despite one of the admin's telling him explicitly they were interested in working with him to help make lainchan supported on catchan. He asked for a very clear yes or no before coming here.
No, he had plenty of warnings. It didn't even take long to find one. See >>421.

If we were trying to hide his userscript from people, repeatedly asking him to make an entire thread dedicated towards it seems like a pretty awful way of going about it. No one ever said we can't support catchan. He can still make a thread about it in /μ/. Him choosing not to is his decision.

>The whole thing's just a soykafshow on lainchan's part, and hopefully it's just incompetence and not malice, but what I want to know is why the fuck did you delete all the evidence? do you recognize it was a mistake and hope to learn from it or are you going to keep doing it? is there any potential for this team to mature?
I can assure you that it is not malice. We would not be making the effort to address all of your concerns if it were. Please see >>489 as well.

>And do you have any plans to get rid of that cancerous applefag piece of soykaf Kalyx?
I can't even.

>>500
I don't see how irc is supposed to be at all decentralized or transparent relative to the imageboard.

>What do you think is happening here?
I'm not sure, I'd like to know. What was the motivation for hiding all the evidence and do you plan to do it often?

>That is your opinion.
That's not how it works. They're either sensible or they're not.

>If we were trying to hide his userscript from people, repeatedly asking him to make an entire thread dedicated towards it seems like a pretty awful way of going about it
Then why delete all mention is the most relevant discussion possible?

>We would not be making the effort to address all of your concerns if it were
You have yet to address a single concern in the actual mod thread you keep directing people to.

>I can't even.
You can try, I believe in you

>>493
> I do not share your perspective. The reason for the ban was not subjective.
Fair enough

>This never has and never will be enforced
I meant enforcing as in explicating them in an administrative capacity. It's a misuse of the capcode to treat xer's moderation as a personal identity. If you actually believed in transparency you would add preferred pronouns for all admins in the FAQ.

>That was a thread discussing the transfer of the archive. When he was asked to make a new thread, that post still existed.
Fine. Why was it deleted?

>No, will not hide evidence and censor discussion of all our bans
As I've stated before (e.g. in this deleted post), the ban log is useless for transparency or accountability. You do not link to the posts derezzed - it is entirely trust based that the ban reason is at all related to the post itself. Why was the ban and all its context deleted?

>>502
>I'm not sure, I'd like to know. What was the motivation for hiding all the evidence and do you plan to do it often?
This was already addressed in >>486.

>That's not how it works. They're either sensible or they're not.
That is your opinion.

>Then why delete all mention is the most relevant discussion possible?
This was already addressed in >>486.

>You have yet to address a single concern in the actual mod thread you keep directing people to.
May lain have mercy on the mod that has to attend to that thread.

>I meant enforcing as in explicating them in an administrative capacity. It's a misuse of the capcode to treat xer's moderation as a personal identity. If you actually believed in transparency you would add preferred pronouns for all admins in the FAQ.
This is unnecessarily provocative. We are trying to have a constructive conversation. Also I fail to how revealing the gender of our staff has anything to with transparency related to the board. If an individual staff member chooses to disclose their gender, that is fine, but we're not going to require it of them. Likewise you are welcome to have the decency to respect them doing so, but we're not going to require it of you.

>Fine. Why was it deleted?
This was already addressed in >>486.

>As I've stated before (e.g. in this deleted post), the ban log is useless for transparency or accountability. You do not link to the posts derezzed - it is entirely trust based that the ban reason is at all related to the post itself. Why was the ban and all its context deleted?
At the end of the day you're going to have to decide for yourself whether you trust us or not. I would hope that we can earn your trust, but I cannot force it on you.

>>506
>May lain have mercy on the mod that has to attend to that thread.
The only reason so much is collated in that thread is because you've aggressively deleted all those posts from the rest of /q/. I'm sorry they've come back from the grave and actually have to be addressed now. RIP to all the other anons who weren't able to be capped in time.

>That is your opinion.
Are you interested in honest discourse with your user base or not? A user discussing whether a ban falls under certain rules, etc. is not an "opinion". You can discuss whether or not you agree with their interpretation of the situation, the rules or moderation policy, but saying it's just your opinion is throwing out the whole criticism and can be used on anything anyone says. Inb4 that's just your opinion. You belong on 0chan.

>This was already addressed in >>486.
None of the questions were addressed in the post. Why were the threads deleted and what was the motivation for covering up the evidence of the ban?

>At the end of the day you're going to have to decide for yourself whether you trust us or not. I would hope that we can earn your trust, but I cannot force it on you.
Don't act like this is out of your hands. You can actually work with the community and make an effort to earn their trust. You can also implement policy that would preserve trust. Why not start by actually considering making the ban log remotely accountable? Instead of just brushing off the possibility of doing anything different at all? It is useless in its current state. It tells you nothing, not even which moderator is responsible for the actions. It is not transparency.

You're one of the most disingenuous mods I've seen make a reply here, but at least you don't use a name.

>>509
could you be so kind as to explain what it is you want us to do and/or, in your view, we could do to solve this properly?

>>510
Address the criticisms in the moderation thread instead of deleting them or using lies to dismiss them and ban me. I've stated quite clearly what suggestions I believe would be beneficial for everyone on the board.

This isn't complicated. Why is the admin in the transparency thread the only one willing to hold an honest discourse?

>>506
>This is unnecessarily provocative. We are trying to have a constructive conversation.
It is relevant. As I said it's an inappropriate use of the mod capcode to take on points of identity you expect the users to know beyond what's directly relevant to moderation. It was completely out of place and in bad taste to include in the ban.

I had this bookmarked but it is not loading anymore: https://archive.lainchan.jp/sci/res/12.html

Can you restore it or just make the files available somehow?

>>2594
Sorry for causing that to break, incidentally just wanted domain squatters to not get that domain.
Seph if you'd like to tell us what DNS should point where.

>>2603
please contact me on telegram or kalyx@riseup.net